EDUCATION FINANCE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 733, 4 February 1910, Page 4

EDUCATION FINANCE.

In a long statement at the opening of the Addington School yesterday the Minister lor Education made his reply to the .recent criticisms, of his action in cutting down the rebuilding grants! to Education Boards and his very extraordinary defence of that reduction. We pointed out a couple of days ago that the Minister had practically declared that the reduction in the vote for rebuilding was a sort of' rebuke to the Boards for their alleged mis-handling of the . moneys, allocated to them. Yesterday he changed' his ground,, as. it was inevitable he would have to do, and he admitted—though of course not directly—that the reduced - grants are part of the retrenchment necessitated by the Government's extravagance. We can, well understand Mr. Fowlds's reluctance to admit' that 'one effect of -the reckless expenditure of the Government has been the pinching of primary education, but - he might quite: as well have made the admission voluntarily and at first; Justice to'the Minister requires us to add that Government has not made any reduction of the total vote' for all purposes under the head of. Education. .The Minister's;, fault ■ was want of candour, in his original' statement, arid want of. friendliness for the Boards in their unexpected, embarrassment. . One statement in. Mb. Fowlds's speech requires to be noted without delay, since if allowed to pass, un-, challenged it- may:'convey a most misleading impression to the public. "In passing," so he is reported to have said, he , desired to mention that they got. a credit to education account of £47,000 fromNaticmal and he: , was inclined to think that if it had not been for that windfall he would' have been compelled: to/make larger,reductions in other' directions. ; Those who were continually crying out wanting the Government to sell the freehold of its lands should bear that factin, mind." We should'be justified if we employed very sharp terms in criti-: oising a statement of that-kind.: It is; sufficient,, however, to ! point. out its misleading 4 character. . Mr. Fowlds would have the public believe that,if it wore not for the National Endowment Act that' £47,000 would have .; been missing from tho Consolidated Fund. "Ii it 1 had not been for that windfall,' : the: £47,000 would/ simply - have been available for . some other Department, which would - then' require: £•17,000 less from tho .r. Consolidated Fund,' which would thai have been able to allow £-17,000 more to the Education Department. In other words, tho; • Education- vote is not ;< really , affected by ■_ one penny picco by the.: National Endowments : • Act. Had that Act. not been passed, every singlo item .iii the Estimates would have Deen unaf-, fected. The Act is simply , a little, machine for: taking sixpence out of ono pocket of . the Treasurer and placing it in his other pocket We are surprised that MB. Fowlds should resort to such a crude little attempt to mislead, the public.